New feature Request

[Be Secure]

Avast! team pls add Anti-ransomware tool in all avast! version in avast! beta 2016.I know there are some anti-cyptowall are free like crypto prevent.But i want avast! to make a step Like avast! did in  mobile avast! Ransomware Removal.Make a Pc version.

[Staticguy]

BitDefender 2016 has got ransomware protection. Should be awesome if Avast 2016 includes this.

[Secondmineboy]

Bitdefenders Ransomware protection only protects folders that you set it to protect and its OFF by default, so its mostly useless.

Kaspersky has Ransomware protection too, but system-wide and automated

[Be Secure]

BitDefender 2016 has got ransomware protection. Should be awesome if Avast 2016 includes this.

Emsisoft has improved:Ransomware detection in behavior blocker.So why not avast! put a decent ransomware protection.If Emsisoft do it,why not Avast!?

[DavidR]

Avast doesn't have a tools as such but it does have ransomware detection signatures.

Some of these could also be detected by the HIPS or other heuristics detections.

[Be Secure]

Avast doesn't have a tools as such but it does have ransomware detection signatures.

Some of these could also be detected by the HIPS or other heuristics detections.

All so hope in 2016 version cloud has improved ransomware detection.

[Be Secure]

It would be lighter when web shield detection tottaly come from Cloud.It saved the disk space of the system

[DavidR]

It would be lighter when web shield detection tottaly come from Cloud.It saved the disk space of the system

It would also leave you more exposed if you didn't have access to the avast cloud, server issues, etc.

Being totally reliant on one detection option isn't wise.

[dbrisendine]

Definitions (in this case) are totally "pacifying the masses" and not effective in most cases.  CryptoMonitor (or similar type software) seems to be the best so far in defending BUT everything seems to be reactive not proactive (in these cases).  CryptoPrevent has been bypassed in the field; just FYI ....

[Avosec-UK]

The Avast Sandbox should do the trick...

It has a feature called Virtualized Folders, it allows the users to select folders from where any executed applications will be sandboxed.

In the previous versions wildcarded paths didn't work (despite saying it does), only full paths.. And it wasn't taking the sandox exclusions into account when automatically virtualizing files from the selected locations.

Now, how this may be used? Well software restrictions policies appeared to be really effective against many types of malware incl. ransomware. The list of locations could be found here: http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/virus-removal/cryptowall-ransomware-information#prevent

Anyway, if the component is fixed i.e. the wildcards work and it consults with the SB exclusions prior to sandbox a process from a virtualized folder, I don't see why this could not be used? Obviously this will not protect the systems if the source is an exploited software, but at least is something.

I installed the beta version today to check if these have been fixed, but *oh the irony*, I had to deal with a Cryptowall Infection on a ~40 computers network..

I will test tomorrow and let you know.

[Be Secure]

avast! should give a phishing webpage submisson option(Manually on AOS)Or in Avast! GUI

[Avosec-UK]

I will test tomorrow and let you know.

Further to my reply yesterday,  I can confirm that the wildcards still not work and the exclusions are ignored.

[schmidthouse]

IMHO, I think refining and improving further development of "EXISTING MODULES" is far more important and should be the priority BEFORE trying to implement further services/bloatware.

[Asyn]

IMHO, I think refining and improving further development of "EXISTING MODULES" is far more important and should be the priority BEFORE trying to implement further services/bloatware.

+1

[Avosec-UK]

IMHO, I think refining and improving further development of "EXISTING MODULES" is far more important and should be the priority BEFORE trying to implement further services/bloatware.

My thoughts exactly.

The Sandbox is an existing module and it needs improvement, especially if it says that it supports the ? and * symbols for the path entries.